BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 740
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
740 (Weber) - As Amended April 20, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Education |Vote:|7 - 0 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY: This bill requires the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI), by January 1, 2017, to recommend a schedule
to the State Board of Education (SBE) for the regular update of
academic content standards. Further, this bill authorizes the
SBE to convene academic content standards advisory committees
(advisory committees) to update the standards, and requires that
the SBE adopt or reject the updated standards. Specifically,
AB 740
Page 2
this bill:
1)Requires the schedule to update standards be aligned to the
current eight-year cycle of curriculum framework updates and
instructional materials adoptions. Further, expresses
Legislative intent that the content standards be updated
before revising curriculum frameworks and curriculum framework
revision occur before adoption of instructional materials.
2)Requires the SBE to determine whether an update is required
when the academic content standards in a given subject area
come up for review. This determination shall be based upon: a)
the amount of time since the standards were adopted or last
updated; b) whether additional research conducted since the
standards were adopted or last updated justifies updates to
the standards; and c) the potential impact on existing
curriculum, instructional materials, and assessment systems
based upon the standards.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)Annual General Fund administrative costs of approximately
$800,000 to develop a new Content Standards Unit within the
California Department of Education. The bill directs the
standards to be tied to the eight-year cycle for frameworks
and adoptions. It is likely staff would be need to work on
more than one project each year, on an ongoing basis.
2)One-time costs of approximately $100,000 (GF/non-98) to
convene each Academic Content Standards Advisory Committee.
There are currently ten subjects that could be updated.
AB 740
Page 3
3)The adoption of new content standards has a multiplier effect
that will lead to additional costs. Once new curriculum
standards are adopted, frameworks aligned to those standards
must be adopted. After frameworks are adopted, an
instructional materials adoption follows. General Fund
administrative costs for these activities average about $1
million each. In addition to these costs, local education
agencies would incur additional Proposition 98/GF costs to
purchase instructional materials and provide professional
development.
SUMMARY Continued:
1)Requires the SBE to convene an academic content standards
advisory committee (advisory committee) if the SBE determines
that an update to the academic content standards in a given
subject is warranted. This committee shall consist of 21
members, as follows: a) 10 members appointed by the Governor;
b) four members appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules; c)
four members appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; and,
three members appointed by the SPI. Requires members of an
advisory committee to serve without compensation, except for
actual and necessary travel expenses and substitute costs.
2)Requires that not less than one-half of the members appointed
by each of the appointing authorities be current public school
elementary or secondary classroom teachers who have a
professional credential under state law, and meet the
definition of "highly qualified" under federal law. Further
expresses Legislative intent around subject matter expertise
and reflect the diverse California population.
AB 740
Page 4
3)Requires each advisory committee to conduct at least two, and
no more than six, in-person meetings that are open to the
public and include opportunities for public input. Further
specifies, upon completing this review, the terms of the
members cease.
4)Requires each advisory committee to forward the updated
standards to the SBE, who must adopt or reject the standards,
as specified, within 120 days of the receipt.
5)Requires the California Department of Education (CDE), prior
to final action by the advisory committee, to post proposed
updates on its website for a minimum of 60 days. The CDE must
include a link by which members of the public may submit
comments on the proposed updates.
6)Requires the SPI to develop, and the SBE to adopt, guidelines
to implement this section.
7)States that the convening of an academic content standards
advisory committee is contingent upon the Legislature
appropriating funds for that purpose in the annual Budget Act.
COMMENTS:
AB 740
Page 5
Purpose. Currently there is no process in place for the regular
review and update of the academic content standards. Some of
California's current standards, such as the history-social
science standards, date back to 1998. As a result, each time
standards need to be updated, even if the updates are only
minor, new legislation must be enacted. According to the author,
the vast amount of legislation to update content standards has
created an unpredictable process for school districts and
teachers, making it challenging to plan for changes in
curriculum. This bill creates a rational and predictable process
to help school districts plan for changes in curriculum.
Analysis Prepared by:Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)
319-2081